MOSCOW, August 19 (RIA Novosti)
Georgian conflict aftermath more complex than officially presented / Threats to kick Russia out of G8 are somewhat empty - analyst / USA may support projects to build new transit pipelines via Russia - analyst/ Russian army may stay in South Ossetia forever / Russian major defense companies' revenues up by 40%/ Russia to rebuild Iraq's Soviet-era power plants /
Gazeta
Georgian conflict aftermath more complex than officially presented
The recent Russian-Georgian war, even though short and obviously successful, is bound to turn into Moscow's military-political and diplomatic defeat in the long run.
So what has Mikheil Saakashvili lost and what has he gained? He has lost the Kodori Gorge, the Georgian enclaves in South Ossetia and any hope of gaining control over the two rebel republics any time soon. On the other hand, he elevated the Georgian-Abkhazian and Georgian-Ossetian conflicts to an international scale, with international observers sent to monitor the developments, and later, possibly, international peacekeepers. And, most importantly, Saakashvili has in fact obtained Western guarantees that his regime won't be overthrown by Russia.
What about Russia's gains and losses? Pro-Russian forces have taken control over the Kodori Gorge, conducted ethnic purges in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and removed the threat of a Georgian invasion of the republics, and that was it.
As for adverse consequences, they are rather more numerous. For the first time since 1991, Russia has found itself as close to international isolation as ever. Western powers can't help seeing in its behavior traces of what Germany did in 1938-1939 and the Soviet Union in 1939-1940.
Leaders of European powers are highly unlikely to risk a second Munich now. Western media compare South Ossetia to Czech Sudetenland increasingly often.
As for the United States, whose government immediately and without any hesitation took the Georgian side, the Russian-Georgian conflict raised John McCain's chances at the upcoming presidential elections, as the senator is known for his consistent anti-Russian stance. His proposal to expel Russia from the G8 has been as good as accepted, as the other seven industrial nations have been gathering for consultations about the conflict without Russia.
The expulsion issue will be discussed at the August 19 meeting of NATO foreign ministers.
Worst of all, Moscow seems to have lost its most devoted European ally. German Chancellor Angela Merkel supported Georgia and demanded an immediate pullout of Russian forces, disregarding even Germany's heavy dependence on Russia's gas.
The French president is equally unlikely to risk supporting Russia's policy toward Georgia in the long run. He has already warned Russia about serious consequences if the pullout is delayed.
It looks like we might as well forget about the liberal changes expected from Dmitry Medvedev's presidency. And the West seems serious this time about confronting Russia, which is growing stronger and bolder by the minute.
Gazeta.ru
Kommersant
Threats to kick Russia out of G8 are somewhat empty - analyst
U.S. President George W. Bush's threats to exclude Russia from international bodies and launch a Cold War are the usual rhetoric, says Nikolai Zlobin, director of Russian and Asian programs at the U.S. Center for Defense Information. Overseas, he says, some influential voices have already come out condemning such calls.
"It beats me what they mean when they say Russia will be excluded from the G8," he wonders. "There is no formal procedure either for expelling or admitting - everything is hazy and indefinite. Dropping one from the G8 is the same as striking one off a list of invitees to your birthday. I think the role of this organization is blown out of proportion in Russia."
"If Russia were to decide now to pull demonstrably out of the G8, it would create no fewer problems for its Western partners," he said.
"The West should pause and examine what aims it pursues," Zlobin urged. "The moves Bush has listed have one simple aim: to give Russia a verbal scare. The U.S. president is, of course, the architect of foreign policy, but policy takes a long time to shape and is very inert, and all these sharp remarks by Bush are far from translating into practice. Bush will have neither time nor political strength to do anything about it, considering that he is stepping down in a few months' time."
"I agree with [Foreign Minister] Lavrov that Georgia is a large foreign policy project of the Bush administration," Zlobin said. "It would be unfair for it to tell Saakashvili and other U.S. allies that the United States will not come to their aid today. This may set these allies scratching their heads and wondering if they would be ditched as the U.S. ditched Georgia. And today the U.S. administration will be saying very harsh words, knowing that the burden of acting on them will rest with somebody else."
"That's not a very good idea," Richard Lugar, deputy chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said last Sunday. He was commenting on a proposal by U.S. presidential hopeful John McCain to strip Russia of G8 membership.
Lugar pointed out that on a number of international issues, above all in talks with countries seeking their own nuclear weapons, Washington needs Moscow's partnership. Also, he said, the United States is working with Russia to reduce the number of warheads targeted at the U.S.
Vedomosti
USA may support projects to build new transit pipelines via Russia - analyst
For a long time, the United States' interest in the Caspian region was explained by the creation of alternative routes of hydrocarbons transit to Europe bypassing Russia. However, China seems to be a more serious rival than Russia. This is why the United States' main goal in the region is Iran, with its 15.7% of the world's total proven gas reserves, and barring Caspian oil and Central Asian gas from the Chinese and Indian markets.
At present, political tensions have begun to rise on all potential gas transit routes from Iran to India and China (proof of this is Pervez Musharraf's resignation).
The South Ossetian war drama is not yet over when some other areas may be added to the map of military conflicts in the region. A new war may flare up in Nagorny Karabakh. Azerbaijan managed to make good money from oil sales over the past two years (its oil output rose by 44.9% in 2006 and by 31.7% in 2007) and invested it in the army, among other things. The United States may keep aloof at the first strike stage (like it was in South Ossetia) and then get another pretext for the entry of its armed forces into the region.
Obviously, the United States and some European countries will oppose the presence of Russian troops with any mandate in both Georgia and South Ossetia and insist on the NATO or American peacekeepers' presence in Georgia. If the events in South Ossetia are presented as Russia's aggression [against Georgia], this will serve as a pretext for their presence.
US military presence in Georgia and Azerbaijan will increase military pressure on Iran. It will outweigh the importance of transit pipelines bypassing Russia. The theme of the Trans-Caspian and Nabucco gas pipeline projects, as well as some other projects, may be closed. Central Asian countries will have two options left: gas transit to Europe via Russia, or entry to the Chinese market. The second option is more dangerous for the US. Therefore, theoretically, it is quite possible to win US support for new pipeline projects via Russia, but Russia will have to pay dearly for such support. It will have to abandon Iran and to ignore China's strategic interests. It is difficult to make a choice. However, Russia's multi-vector foreign policy is coming to an end.
Konstantin Simonov is director general of the National Energy Security Foundation
Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Vremya Novostei
Russian army may stay in South Ossetia forever
South Ossetian President Eduard Kokoity plans to ask Russia to deploy a permanent military base in South Ossetia to avert more "genocide attempts" against the South Ossetian people. Whatever obstacles there are to the idea could easily be removed once Russia adopts a more active policy toward the self-proclaimed republics.
"South Ossetia cannot ensure its own security against Georgia's aggressive moves backed by Western weapons. Therefore, the only possible guarantor of our security we can see now is Russia," Irina Gagloyeva, head of the republic's information and press committee, told NG.
A high-ranking source in the South Ossetian government said the republic even has the infrastructure required for hosting Russian bases. Two military cantonments have been built there recently, one in Java, and the other right near Tskhinvali.
So far, international law prevents Russia from placing a military base in South Ossetia, because Russia still officially recognizes Georgia's territorial integrity. However, legal experts believe that, even if one country (Russia for example) recognizes South Ossetia's independence, one will be able to begin negotiating the issue with Tskhinvali.
Military experts are unanimously suggesting deploying to South Ossetia a reinforced brigade of around 3,000 men with armored vehicles, tanks and artillery mounts. Another several hundred troops will be required to back up the brigade with tactical forces, including air defense weapons.
Alexander Vladimirov, vice president of the Russian Board of Military Experts, is convinced that Russia shouldn't stop after completing the operation, but establish a full-fledged military presence in the North Caucasus, including regular military bases which would control the region. He warned that Saakashvili cannot be trusted to have abandoned his reckless moves.
In all probability, the Russian authorities are considering the issue, while Kokoity is probing current public moods by his statements. Otherwise, it would be hard to interpret the latest statement by Anatoly Nogovitsyn, deputy chief of the Russian General Staff, who said he was more certain about when New Year would come than when Russian troops would pull out of Georgia.
Moscow will probably have to make the first step by showing more resolve in recognizing the two republics' independence; the next step will be the deployment of military bases there.
Vedomosti
Russian major defense companies' revenues up by 40%
The revenues of Russia's nine major defense corporations included in the Defense News Top 100 Arms Dealers reached $9.8 billion last year.
Compared to 2006, when there were 11 Russian enterprises on the list, in 2007, nine companies saw a 40% rise in revenues.
The Severnaya Verf and Admiralteiskaya Verf were taken off the list after they had completed major orders by China for destroyers and submarines. The biggest Russian company in the defense sector is the Almaz-Antei Air Defense Concern, with an annual revenue of $2.89 billion, followed by the Aviation Holding Company Sukhoi with $1.79 billion.
"The total revenue of all the Russian companies included on the list would be between the ninth and tenth places, which are occupied by Italy's Finmeccanica with $10.6 billion, and the U.S. United Technologies, with $8.8 billion," said Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies. "The Russian companies' revenues are 3.5 times lower than that of the world's defense leader, the U.S. Lockheed Martin with $38.5 billion. Exports are still a major part of Russian companies' sales."
"To be prepared for possible conflicts like the one with Georgia, the Russian Armed Forces have to purchase new and upgrade the already available weapons, which are manufactured by just a few companies on the list," said Igor Korotchenko, member of the Defense Ministry's Public Council. "They are the Instrument Design Bureau in Tula (a wide variety of infantry and small caliber weapons), Russia's Helicopters (airlift and attack helicopters Mi-8 Hip and Mi-24 Hind), and the Aviation Holding Company Sukhoi (Su-25 Frogfoot ground attack aircraft).
The Georgian Su-25s, which attacked Tskhinvali and the Russian troops, had been modernized with the assistance of Israeli specialists and were superior to Russian aircraft, a source in Russia's Defense Ministry said.
The conflict with Georgia, however, does not reflect the modern trends, said Korotchenko. Therefore, regarding conventional weapons, improving the aerospace defense should be a priority for Russia, and could be carried out by the Almaz-Antei Concern.
Kommersant
Russia to rebuild Iraq's Soviet-era power plants
Russia is planning to continue its presence in Iraq's power and energy sector. The first project could be to restore the Kharta thermal power plant, a job to be done by Russia's Tekhnopromexport (TPE) company.
Moscow has a fairly good chance of gaining access to the $10 billion Iraq has decided to spend on rebuilding its generating facilities.
During the Gulf War, Iraq's power sector suffered badly. Its current installed capacity amounts to 5,500 MW, compared with the required 10,000 MW in the course of a year and up to 12,000 MW in the summer. Previously, the Iraqi authorities said their power industry would take $10-15 billion to restore.
Tekhnopromexport has repeatedly won tenders for rebuilding the Kharta plant - in 1997, 1999 and 2007. This 400MW thermal power plant fires fuel oil and gas.
According to Natalia Starodumova, a TPE spokeswoman, the company is ready to start construction, but on condition that care is taken of security and of the fact that prices for materials and equipment have grown over the past 18 months. She also said that it was not the TPE's first project in Iraq: the company is currently fulfilling a contract for the construction of the Yusifiya plant, halted several times because of hostilities and still unfinished. Starodumova did not name the contract price.
Fyodor Kornachev, an AntantaPioglobal analyst, said that "considering 1 kW of installed capacity in Russia costs $1,300 to $1,500 to build, the Kharta plant of 400 MW could cost Iraq $520-600 million."
A spokesman for Russia's Energy Ministry said the sides had discussed no other projects. He said cooperation with Iraq was as important for Russia as cooperation with other Middle East countries.
"Such cooperation can be successful only in the modernization of plants built by Soviet engineers," said Vasily Sapozhnikov, an analyst from Otkrytiye investment financial company. As regards the construction of new plants, the analyst said, Russian companies could not compete with Western ones. He said that modern Russian plants are provided with Siemens and General Electric boilers and turbines, while Russian companies act only as building contractors. However, he said, Iraq is dotted with power plants built in the Soviet era.
RIA Novosti is not responsible for the content of outside sources.
